Cheney's the One

By Roy Ulrich

The nation is abuzz with talk of Presidential impeachment. But House speaker Nancy Pelosi has taken the subject "off the table." And the reason she gives is compelling: the Democratic majority will be overplaying its hand, just as the Gingrich crowd did in 1998. The voters, the argument goes, expect less partisanship and more actual accomplishments from the newly-installed Democratic majority.

While this argument is persuasive with respect to President Bush, the same cannot be said of Vice President Cheney. First, as a purely political matter, we should not forget that Mr. Cheney's poll numbers are even lower than his putative boss. A scant 18% of Americans have a favorable view of the Vice President.

Obviously, Bush would remain President even if Cheney were removed from office. All that the President would lose is one of his two brains, the other one belonging to his top political aide. The President would still be able to carry out his normal duties until January of 2009 without having to worry about his own hide. Of course, he would have one additional duty: naming a replacement for the deposed Vice President. That person, in turn, would be subject to confirmation by both houses of Congress. Thus, the likelihood is we would end up with a less divisive figure as Veep than the current occupant of that office.

The case against Mr. Cheney is in some ways stronger than the case against Mr. Bush. Consider the ongoing trial of Lewis "Scooter" Libby taking place in the nation's capitol. Testimony to date has pretty much established that Libby was a simple pawn in the Veep's ongoing campaign to steer the United States into war in Iraq. When Mr. Cheney takes the stand as a defense witness, we will hopefully learn the answers to at least some of the following questions:

1. Did the Vice President sanction the leak of Valerie Plame's name to syndicated columnist

Robert Novak?

2. Did he know what Valerie Plame actually did at the CIA?

3. Was he aware that his top aide was telling the FBI apparently false information?

4. Inasmuch as he knew that the intelligence for the war had been cooked, was he

involved in a cover-up?

And, in the event there is an impeachment trial in the Senate, we will hopefully learn about the role oil played in the run-up to the war. As Halliburton's former CEO, Mr. Cheney profited substantially from the no-bid contracts awarded to the company. An important question that needs an answer is what part, if any, did Mr. Cheney play in securing these contracts.

Nor should we forget that it is Mr. Cheney who has been the main proponent of the "unitary executive." In his view, Presidential power is almost without limits. As a consequence, we have everything from signing statements to repeated violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, both of which show utter contempt for the legislative branch. The most explicit exposition of this view comes from John Yoo, the former Justice Department lawyer and author of a 2002 memo sanctioning torture of U.S. detainees in violation of the Geneva conventions and the War Powers Act of 1996.

To those who argue that the Senate will never be able secure the 2/3 vote necessary to secure a conviction, there are two simple rejoinders:

We have not heard Mr. Cheney's testimony at the Libby trial; and the exact role Mr. Cheney played in securing

the Halliburton contracts in Iraq can and should be determined during an impeachment trial in the Senate.

What is clear is that no other man in the history of this country has consistently abused his office in an effort to undermine democratic principles as has Dick Cheney.

Roy Ulrich is a public interest lawyer, consumer advocate, and public radio broadcaster who lives in Santa Monica. A graduate of the University of California, Berkeley, where he majored in Communications and Public Policy, Mr. Ulrich went on to receive his law degree from California Western University in San Diego in 1969. He specializes in drafting legislation and initiatives on behalf of public interest groups. In that capacity, he serves as President of the California Tax Reform Association and sits on the board of directors of California Common Cause. Mr. Ulrich has written for the editorial pages of the Los Angeles Times and The Nation magazine, among other publications.

Comment viewing options

Nancy Pelosi is currently one of our Nations saddest anti-climax's and I didn't vote for her on that basis. She has made it clear that from the beginning that she doesn't have cojones,
and she's sticking to it by God!
That's why Hillary won't get in either. It takes a certain
"je ne sais qua" and it obviously takes gonads too, since the gonadless just can't seem to get the juice they need to step up to the plate.
It may be the hunter/gatherer that's NOT in them that's allowing them to ignore; 'in good conscience' and with deniable UN-accountability,
the heinous parade of screw ups that is our Prez.
There's 9/11 and Cheney's suspicious involvement, like being placed solely in charge of five war games (disguises) AND any NORAD response at the EXACT moment WTC's were under 'attack', and then there's that,
"The plane is 10 miles out sir, do the orders till stand?" business.
Then there's the "......I watching TV and I saw the first plane hit the World Trade Center, and I thought, boy, that's one terrible pilot...." from the dub.
Then of course we ALL know about two stolen elections and the invisible WMD's, and the evasive Osama bin Laden and the fact that the FBI is NOT looking for him for 9/11, nor is the Prez. From there it's an easy slide to the Patriot(rape), Homeland exploitation, wiretapping, signing statements, perpetual war and the hoarding of our money my KBR.
But I digress.
I'm still focusing on 9/11; The Mother of all this and have put together a single page with 735 links by story title exposing the PNAC Plot on 9/11.http://erroneousbusczh.homestead.com/9-11Plot.html
Nancy, you need to read this, and study every photograph, then join with your peers in the TOTAL IMPEACHMENT of the GOP.
YOUR constituents DEMAND THIS.

"Pelosi has taken the subject "off the table." And the reason she gives is compelling: the Democratic majority will be overplaying its hand, just as the Gingrich crowd did in 1998. The voters, the argument goes, expect less partisanship and more actual accomplishments from the newly-installed Democratic majority."

The "Gingrich crowd" had less than 40% of the country on its side in the Clinton Blow Job caper. That analogy simply holds no water in comparison to the current circumstances. There was no Constitutional crisis in 1998. What the "Gingrich crowd" was attempting was a purely political character assassination of the sitting President for a simple extra-marital affair. A serious matter in the Clinton family, but as for the rest of WE THE PEOPLE, Clinton's affair had little meaning outside of the morals of some prudes.

In the current state of affairs, there is a huge Constitutional crisis happening before our very eyes. The fundamental foundations of our system of government have been shaken and cracked to the core by Bush, Cheney et al. Significantly more than a majority of Americans when polled favor impeachment of Bush. However, the polls are not what is important. It is the evidence. The evidence includes bold admissions by both Bush and Cheney which constitute grounds for impeachment.

Earlier today on this site I suggested that the House Judiciary Committee appoint Patrick J. Fitzgerald as lead counsel for its impeachment inquiry. Fitzgerald should be given unlimited financial and human resources to take what he already has uncovered and investigate to build a case not only against Bush and Cheney, but also the sychopantic Supreme Court Justices, Roberts, Scalia, Alito and Thomas. All the Congressional members who have been on the take, no matter what party should also be swept up and vacuumed out of Washington.

Then the next step is to get the rotten money out of the "election" racket. No more differentiation between "hard" and "soft" money in campaign financing would be considered. All "campaign" contributions would be escrowed into a single account and doled out equally to each candidate for a specific elected office. The intent would be to force the candidates themselves to bond with their constitutents and not by 30 second, slick and deceptive ads on radio and TV. Bringing an end to never-ending election campaigning is a worthwhile goal for all, except those who make a killing producing campaign ads. I'm sure they'd all find another area to ply their deceitful trade in the advertising world. Maybe they should go out and seek work that makes a positive difference in the world. No, that is expecting too much from those types.

Pelosi needs to understand what happened November 7, 2006. WE THE PEOPLE spoke. WE THE PEOPLE told Washington, D.C. that we've had enough and we're not going to take it anymore. If Pelosi does not comprehend the message sent on November 7, 2006, then WE THE PEOPLE will find reprresentatives who will comprehend the next time.

perhaps the American people should take matters into their own hands, because the Democrats appear to have forgotten the unspoken, but crystal-clear mandate to impeach which the citizenry gave them on Nov. 7th, by creating a third political party or engaging in tactics which are peaceful, but which will send the unmistakeable message that Americans are "not ready to make nice" with tyrants and patsies who allow tyrants to continue their destructive ways.

Instead of taking bold, decisive action to appoint a special prosecutor to conduct a thorough investigation of Dick Cheney's activities during his tenure as Vice President in regards to the Iraq War, the events of 9/11, along with domestic spying, the stripping of the Constitution and the lack of a speedy response by the administration to the Indonesian tsunami and Hurricane Katrina.

All of these events have led us to a terrible Constitutional crisis, and the evidence that a Constitutional crisis is about to hit us is growing every day. Since the Senate is too caught up in the Presidential "beauty pageant", and in the process, weakening the office of the Presidency, the solution to this Constitutional crisis MUST come from the House of Representatives.

The House Judiciary Committee would have the legal authority to assign a Special Prosecutor (I'd love to see Patrick Fitzgerald get the job) who'd have the ability to conduct his investigation, and after it had been completed, he'd have everything he'd need to build a sufficient case for the impeachment of Cheney, Bush, Rice, Gonzales, and possibly the Supreme Court Justices who ruled on the fraudulent Presidential "election" of 2000.

Afterwards ... work must begin on serious election reform, and everything -- from the length of political campaigns, to the elmination of corporate funding to individual candidates, to the elimination of the Democratic and Republican National Committees from the election campaign process -- would be on the table.

Putting a clear time limit (anywhere from six weeks to three months) on how long a candidate can campaign for political office, placing all "campaign" contributions into a common fund which couldn't be touched by either political party, the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine (so all political candidates -- regardless of political party of affiliation-- would have the opportunity to have their ideas and views heard in the public square), the assurance that all electronic voting machines WILL leave a "paper trail" and a national political primary election week, would go a long way in restoring the confidence of the American people in their electoral system.

But, election reform won't work until Cheney, Bush, et al, are impeached. As long as these people remain sitting the the seats of power, no type of reform will have a lasting impact.

Fitzgerald is close to the Bush family? Really? That IS news. (But sadly, not surprising. They sure know how to cover all the angles, don't they?) Where can I find more info on that little tidbit?

John Kerry and the Shrub are cousins, which might be why Kerry refused to request a recount after the big election rip-off, as Gore wanted to do.

So is Kerry another fox in a big chicken suit?

His "making good grades so you don't have to go to war" joke, the one that caused a big hullaballoo and gave the GOP another reason to have a public hissy fit, could also have been just another media diversion to keep the public from paying attention to the real news (however little of it there is these days).

Support This Site

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.

User login

Username: *

Password: *

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.